FGers considering voting against EU treaty

[NotDevsSon]

FutureTaoiseach's increasingly shrill over the top claims about the treaty will only end up driving don't knows into the yes camp. If the nos follow the approach of making ludicrous claims on the scale on ft they will win the treaty for the yes camp.

Headbanging claims like ft's are no help in this debate.

[FutureTaoiseach]

FutureTaoiseach's increasingly shrill over the top claims about the treaty will only end up driving don't knows into the yes camp. If the nos follow the approach of making ludicrous claims on the scale on ft they will win the treaty for the yes camp.

Headbanging claims like ft's are no help in this debate.

Typical of the arrogance of the "Yes" side in 2001 when Nice was rejected.

[meriwether]

FutureTaoiseach's increasingly shrill over the top claims about the treaty will only end up driving don't knows into the yes camp. If the nos follow the approach of making ludicrous claims on the scale on ft they will win the treaty for the yes camp.

Headbanging claims like ft's are no help in this debate.

Typical of the arrogance of the "Yes" side in 2001 when Nice was rejected.

He's right.
At one point, you were advocating voting no to the treaty because politicians got a pay rise.

Do you have obcessive compulsive disorder?
For instance, you were transfixed with Immigration (I apologise for calling you a racist recently however, that was out of order.)
Then that moved on to the PD's.
Now its the treaty.

Are we going to have to put up with 6 months of you posting nonsense constantly?

[FutureTaoiseach]

FutureTaoiseach's increasingly shrill over the top claims about the treaty will only end up driving don't knows into the yes camp. If the nos follow the approach of making ludicrous claims on the scale on ft they will win the treaty for the yes camp.

Headbanging claims like ft's are no help in this debate.

Typical of the arrogance of the "Yes" side in 2001 when Nice was rejected.

He's right.
At one point, you were advocating voting no to the treaty because politicians got a pay rise.

Among other reasons not just that.

[meriwether]

FutureTaoiseach's increasingly shrill over the top claims about the treaty will only end up driving don't knows into the yes camp. If the nos follow the approach of making ludicrous claims on the scale on ft they will win the treaty for the yes camp.

Headbanging claims like ft's are no help in this debate.

Typical of the arrogance of the "Yes" side in 2001 when Nice was rejected.

He's right.
At one point, you were advocating voting no to the treaty because politicians got a pay rise.

Among other reasons not just that.

Its not a reason at all.

[kerrynorth]

FutureTaoiseach's increasingly shrill over the top claims about the treaty will only end up driving don't knows into the yes camp. If the nos follow the approach of making ludicrous claims on the scale on ft they will win the treaty for the yes camp.

Headbanging claims like ft's are no help in this debate.

Typical of the arrogance of the "Yes" side in 2001 when Nice was rejected.

He's right.
At one point, you were advocating voting no to the treaty because politicians got a pay rise.

Among other reasons not just that.

Its not a reason at all.

I would be a No voter but I have got to say that your rantings will do no more than convince people looking in that No voters are a bunch of loonies FT. This is way too early to get caught up in the minutiate of the Treaty. For sure people will vote No for all kinds of reasons that have got nothing to do with the treaty itself, including the pay rise.

[The Irish Agent]

if put to me now, i'd have to vote no.
i'll have to read it fully before i can make my mind up

[pfkf1]

Well I know its a silly reason, but to answer the orignal post I am voting no simply because Bertie Ahern is asking me to vote yes.

[FutureTaoiseach]

[quote=kerrynorth]

FutureTaoiseach's increasingly shrill over the top claims about the treaty will only end up driving don't knows into the yes camp. If the nos follow the approach of making ludicrous claims on the scale on ft they will win the treaty for the yes camp.

Headbanging claims like ft's are no help in this debate.

Typical of the arrogance of the "Yes" side in 2001 when Nice was rejected.

He's right.
At one point, you were advocating voting no to the treaty because politicians got a pay rise.

Among other reasons not just that.

Its not a reason at all.

I would be a No voter but I have got to say that your rantings will do no more than convince people looking in that No voters are a bunch of loonies FT. This is way too early to get caught up in the minutiate of the Treaty. For sure people will vote No for all kinds of reasons that have got nothing to do with the treaty itself, including the pay rise.[/quote:2v5mat48]

People want to know what's in it so I will tell them.

[gnash1970]

People want to know what's in it so I will tell them.

When? What people? And for Christ's sake, why would they rely on you? You're hardly a reliable source of information.